[Scan-DC] (no subject)

[Kenny Lorber]

Excellent point. I did not mean to lump them together. I believe that all
non-critical tactical channels should be open to listening. However, IF the
departments insist on making something encrypted - why not do it to only
block out those they are most concerned about. It seems that all of the
departments arguments center around the scanner apps for smartphones rather
than physical scanner equipment.

I'm not wealthy by any means - I decided to invest in a scanner because it
would help me to serve my community more efficiently. It will be a big blow
to my volunteering and community service if I can no longer listen in
(especially to the department I volunteer for). Radios are limited in
availability here so I am forced to use a scanner and cell phone.

-Kenny Lorber

On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Bruce Harper <brucebharper at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 11:45 AM, Kenny wrote:
>
>>
>> Couldn't a law be created to ban the cheap scanner apps? The people who
>> have spent a lot of money on actual hardware should not be lumped in with
>> criminals.
>>
>
> And the people with "cheap scanner apps" shouldn't be lumped in there,
> either. The amount of money you have in your pocket shouldn't determine if
> you can listen to "free" airwaves, whether the broadcast is from the local
> FM radio station or your local police department. Personally, I believe
> (and always have) that the "criminals can listen is" is a bogus argument
> from the law enforcement folks. Open government at all levels should be the
> goal of every citizen (and taxpayer) -- hiding behind encryption makes one
> wonder what the government is trying to hide.
>
> Bruce in Blacksburg
>
>